One that no doubt somehow brings up the fact that Bill Clinton got a blowjob in the Oval office.
That’s how Vince Foster died, you know. He was giving Bill a blowjob and Bill came so hard he blew Vince’s head clean off.
-Joe
I’ve never voted Democrat, but I completely agree. Limbaugh has been an embarrassment for almost his whole career, and I can’t stand to listen to him for more than 5 minutes. I’m embarrassed that the local powerful AM talk station puts him on the air every day.
I don’t even need to pull up the issue of his drug addiction; we all have our defects. What really bugs me is his presentation of a “reasoned defense of conservatism” that I can take apart on the fly. He’s also egotistical on a level that really bugs me.
I would thank God if he lost his voice, actually.
Hello pot…does anybody remember the last 8 years. Bush used the veto less than any president in the previous century and STILL nothing got through congress. Obstructionist? The only people with a lower approval rating than Bush was the Democratically run Congress.
Franken is a bitter, never funny comedian who got elected in Minnesota–so did Jesse “the Body” Ventura. Is he qualified to be senator? Yes he’s over the age of 30, been a citizen all his life (only need to be for 9 years) and was elected–quite possibly–by a majority of Minnesotans. Those are the only qualifications for the job. Does that mean he’ll do a good job? I doubt it. he seems as shallow as a kiddie pool in a drought.
Also explain to me how “Republican greed” started the Great Depression?
I also like the Stalin comment previous. Let’s see, he’s the guy who nationalized business and expanded government. You’re right. That DOES sound familiar.
Why precisely would a Republican run congress, which is waht it was for the entire time that Bush issued no vetoes, obstruct a Republican president?
Yeah. People who graduate cum laude from Harvard with a degree in political science are notoriously over their heads in matters of politics.
“I am obliged to confess I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University.”
~William F. Buckley
*“Who gives a shit?” *
~Jack Q. Batty
Was that before or after he published his piece about how the white race had a duty and an obligation to dominate in the South, and to bring the lesser folks toward equality at a sober and prudent pace?
It was both before he said that and before he subsequently retracted it.
As I’m sure you perfectly well know.
It was also before his son (and a bunch of other prominent conservatives) endorsed Obama, and was subsequently essentially fired from the magazine Buckley Jr. founded, right?
He said what he said. You can’t unring that bell.
Another bell from Buckley that could not be unringed (in this case it was against the bush administration)
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NGY0MDE1MDRhYzcxMzc2ODExMTMzZjgyZmZhNzljN2I=
BTW the thing Buckley did “wrong” there was to agree with many on the left that the uncovering of Valerie Plame was a criminal act. I’m almost sure Buckley got a lot of heat for it from the right so it was fun for me to see him go into extreme contortions to defend Scooter and the Bush gang in later articles.
Did I try to unring it?
He said what he said based on how he felt at the time. He subsequently came to believe he was wrong, saying that ‘it was absolutely the right thing to do’ with regard to government interceding on behalf of civil rights.
He also came to favor legalization of marijuana and to feel, once the facts were in, that the Iraq war was a mistake. He had no problem changing his mind when facts or circumstances dictated it.
I thought the ability to change one’s mind was supposed to be an admired quality around here.
ETA: P.S. - He never did retract his view of the Harvard faculty. 
Yale alumnus and a Bonesman saying something bad about Harvard? I’m shocked, shocked I tell you.
And I would quite agree, up to the point that I have long held that we should not be ruled by privileged and well-born white men. Its just that I don’t offer him any exemption. He was quite content with the ruling class status he shared with such men, he was simply aghast that they didn’t share his brand of Calvinistic Catholicism. He was witty, erudite, and unflinchingly wrong.
But polite!
We are still waiting for examples of your mind changing. So, nothing to admire from you yet.
This is false. The Republican-run Congress also had a lower approval rating than Bush, as in this 2005 poll where Bush was at 39% approval and the Republican-majority Congress at 29%.
Moreover, towards the end of his administration, polls were giving higher approval ratings to Congressional Democrats than to Bush or to Congressional Republicans, as in this December 2008 poll where Bush achieved a 29% approval rating, Congressional Republicans 25%, and Congressional Democrats 37%.
Your inability to correctly report even straightforward facts about approval rating polls does not inspire a whole lot of confidence in your ability to evaluate the merits of politicians.
Well, first and foremost he never tried to rule anyone. And he counted among his friends and admirerers people from all political persuasions, religious beliefs and walks of life. He was never one to allow any of these factors to interfere with his admiration or friendship.
And a slight correction: he was witty, erudite, and only occasionally wrong.
He was indeed polite.
Not so at all. Why, just the other day I changed my mind about your honesty and integrity.